Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
US authorities urged to suppress "supermax" high-security prison cells
10 May 2000
Share
CAT
24th Session
10 May 2000
Morning
Urges the US Authorities to Suppress "Supermax" High Security Prison Cells
The Committee against Torture this morning started its consideration of an initial report presented by a Government delegation from the United States on that country’s compliance with its obligations under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Introducing the report, Harold Hongju Koh, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labour of the United States, affirmed that his country had long been a vigorous supporter of the international fight against torture. He said that while the United States could not claim to have entirely eliminated torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment from the country, it was determined to make continuing progress.
Peter Thomas Burns, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of the United States, said that there was a difference in the definition of torture by the United States when compared to that in article 1 of the Convention; and if the definition was not in conformity with the Convention, it was difficult for the United States to fulfil its obligations.
Sayed Kassem El Masry, the Committee expert who served as co-rapporteur, said that the problems relating to torture in the United States did not match the severity of the failures in other countries, but they were surprising and disturbing. This was particularly because the United States Government acted like the guardian of human rights in the world. All human-rights violations ought to be prevented, not only those happening in foreign lands. One should have one yard-stick and an even handed scale by which one would measure the circumstances in all countries of the world, he said.
Other Committee experts also took the floor to express concerns that the prison population in the United States was higher than any country in the world and was increasingly susceptible to ill-treatment and torture. They urged the United States to suppress the “supermax” high security cells in prisons.
The United States delegation also included Christopher Camponovo, of the Office of the Assistant Legal Advisor, Department of State; Edward R. Cummings, Counsellor for Legal Affairs, at the United States Mission to the United Nations Office at Geneva; Pamela E. Holmes, Second Secretary; John D. Long, Counsellor for Political and Specialized Agencies Affairs at the Mission; Cheryl Sim, First Secretary; Stephen A. Solomon, Assistant Counsellor for Legal Affairs; Ande Surena, Assistant Legal Advisor for Human Rights and Refugees at the State Department; and William Yeoman, Chief of Staff for the Assistant Attorney General at the Department of Justice.
As one of the 119 States parties to the Convention against Torture, the United States must submit summaries of its performance to implement the provisions of the treaty.
The United States will provide its response to the questions raised this morning when it appears again before the Committee at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 11 May.
When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m., it will offer its conclusions and recommendations on the report of Paraguay. It will also hear the response of El Salvador to questions raised earlier by the Committee.
Report of United States
The initial report of the United States (document CAT/C/28/Add.5) enumerates the measures taken by the authorities to comply with the terms of the Convention. The section of the report dealing with general information enumerates the legal framework in which the provisions of the Convention are implemented. It says that torture does not occur in the United States except in aberrational situations and never as a matter of policy. When it does, it constitutes a serious criminal offence, subjecting the perpetrators to prosecution and entitling the victims to various remedies, including rehabilitation and compensation. Although there is no federal law criminalizing torture per se, any act falling within the Convention's definition of torture is clearly illegal and prosecutable everywhere in the country.
In its annexes, the report attaches a list of United States reservations, understandings and declarations on the Convention against Torture; relevant constitutional and legislative provisions; information on capital punishment; and Department of State regulations on torture, among other things. Under factors affecting implementation, the report indicates that the United States Government acknowledges continuing allegations of specific types of abuse and ill-treatment in particular cases, the existence of areas of concern in the context of the criminal justice system, and obstacles to the full achievement of the goals and objectives of the Convention.
The report affirms that the United States currently has the largest prison population and the highest incarceration rate of any country. Sentenced inmates numbered about 436 per 100,000 residents. By mid-year 1997, 1 in every 155 United States residents was incarcerated.
Presentation of Report
HAROLD HONGJU KOH, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labour of the United States, affirmed that his country had long been a vigorous supporter of the international fight against torture. It had played a major role in formulating the United Nations Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted in 1975, and in developing the Torture Convention.
To honour the United States’ commitment of its unequivocal and unambiguous condemnation of torture as a tool of governmental policy, Congress had legislated federal, civil and criminal sanctions against those who practised torture, Mr. Koh said. The courts condemned the practice as a matter of international, federal and state law. Under the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Torture Victims Protection Act, it was recognized that civil remedies against torture were found in the United States, and the federal and state executive branches had indicated zero tolerance for torture within their jurisdiction.
Mr. Koh continued to state that the United States viewed the Convention as a treaty with far-reaching domestic and international implications both in the administration of justice and the promotion of universal human rights. The Convention's norms were deeply internalized in American law and governmental practices, and the United States was committed to promoting the process of further internalization until every vestige of torture within the United States had been wiped out.
While the United States could not claim to have entirely eliminated torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment from the country, it was determined to make continuing progress, Mr. Koh said. The vibrant public debate about police conduct and prison issues in the country, for example, had helped ensure that the authorities constantly reexamined their practices with a view toward making necessary improvements. The United States also recognized that ending the practice of torture was only half the battle. Its commitment to help torture victims was not confined to US residents alone. It also committed to assisting torture victims throughout the world, and supported programmes in Latin America, Africa, Asia, Europe and in the newly independent States. The United States continued to be the largest single donor to the United Nations Voluntary Fund on Torture, having contributed over $ 12 million in total, and providing $ 3 million in 1999 alone.
WILLIAM YEOMANS, Chief of Staff to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice of the United States, affirmed that torture was prohibited by law throughout the United States; no person who committed the abuse while acting under cover of state or federal law was immune from prosecution; and when the Department of Justice was informed of credible allegations of abuse or ill-treatment by police officers, prison guards, or other state actors, those matters were investigated. If the evidence supported a prosecution, those cases were tried in open courts. In criminal matters, because of the federal system, state prosecutors also had the ability to bring the abuser to justice. Either way, those who committed torture in the United States were not above the law.
While the United States was committed to the full and effective implementation of its obligations under the Convention, within the United States there continued to be concerns warranting vigilance regarding matters such as the excessive use of force by law enforcement officers and physical and sexual abuse of inmates, Mr. Yeomans said. The Department of Justice also remained committed to prosecuting law enforcement officers for excessive use of force and other misconduct, protecting the constitutional rights of prisoners, and ensuring that police departments across the country refrained from engaging in patterns of misconduct.
Consideration of Report
PETER THOMAS BURNS, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of the United States, asked the delegation why the submission of the report was delayed by about five years. He said that there was a difference in the definition of torture by the United States and that of article 1 of the Convention. If the definition was not in conformity with the Convention, it was difficult for the United States to fulfil its obligations. He recalled that as a State party to the Convention, the United States had to report on the state of torture in the country; there was no statistical data on the situation of torture and no department was charged with collecting and filing on the issue. Because of the existing difference in the definition of torture, information concerning cases of torture should be taken with caution.
Mr. Burns said that if a person who risked to be expelled to his country of origin should prove that he would be subjected to torture, he should not be extradited or expelled as it was the Committee's view that the presence of a real risk was sufficient enough to justify non-refoulement or extradition. He expressed concern about the instructions to the new recruits of intelligence services, like the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), concerning the interrogation system they should apply. Quoting non-governmental sources such as Amnesty International, he said that the use of the electric belt on suspects interrogated by federal agents could cause considerable damage and suffering. Why did the United States not consider such practices as constituting cruel and inhuman treatment?
Mr. Burns also asked the delegation if the United States admitted the principle of universal jurisdiction for acts of torture committed anywhere, such as concerning the case of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. He gave other examples in which the United States did not act in arresting prosecutors of torture of other nationals who happened to be in its territory. He also mentioned another case in which the United States refused to extradite to Haiti a former official of the Duvallier regime, which he said constituted a violation of the provisions of the Convention.
SAYED KASSEM EL MASRY, the Committee expert who served as co-rapporteur to the report of the United States, provided a list of abuses which included excessive use of force and even brutality in all posts of police; death of prisoners in custody; overcrowding prison systems; physical and sexual abuse of inmates; lack of adequate training for police and prison guards; and racial bias and discrimination against members of minorities.
Mr. El Masry said that blacks constituted 40 per cent of the prison population while they constituted only 12 per cent of the whole population. Lack of police accountability, including failure to discipline, prosecute and punish police misconduct was also indicated. The excessively harsh conditions and unnecessary stringent procedures in "supermax" security facilities were also criticized.
Mr. El Masry recalled that there were increasing reports of prisoners being tortured and ill treated with electro-shock devices such as stun guns, stun shields or stun belts. Some reports claimed that prisoners had died as a result of those mechanical restraints. He asked if the authorities had made inquiries about the use of those instruments or the effect of chemical methods like the usage of pepper spray. Was there any evaluation of their effect? Was it true that 11 people had died in the United States after being placed in restraint chairs? Were some people interrogated while in the chair? And was it that true that those chairs were used also in juvenile detention centres and in the Immigration and Naturalization Service?
Mr. El Masry said that the problems relating to torture in the United States did not match the severity of the failures in other countries, but they were surprising and disturbing. This was because the United States Government acted like the guardian of human rights in the world. All human-rights violations ought to be prevented, not only those happening in foreign lands. One should have one yard-stick and an even handed scale by which one would measure the circumstances in all countries of the world.
Other members of the Committee also commented on the report. One expert said that according to the Vienna Convention on international treaties, a State party could not justify its non-fulfilment of its obligations on reasons of difficulties. As the number of prisoners increased, the risk of ill-treatment was inevitably higher. Another expert urged the United States to suppress the "supermax" high security cells in the prisons.
* *** *
24th Session
10 May 2000
Morning
Urges the US Authorities to Suppress "Supermax" High Security Prison Cells
The Committee against Torture this morning started its consideration of an initial report presented by a Government delegation from the United States on that country’s compliance with its obligations under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Introducing the report, Harold Hongju Koh, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labour of the United States, affirmed that his country had long been a vigorous supporter of the international fight against torture. He said that while the United States could not claim to have entirely eliminated torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment from the country, it was determined to make continuing progress.
Peter Thomas Burns, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of the United States, said that there was a difference in the definition of torture by the United States when compared to that in article 1 of the Convention; and if the definition was not in conformity with the Convention, it was difficult for the United States to fulfil its obligations.
Sayed Kassem El Masry, the Committee expert who served as co-rapporteur, said that the problems relating to torture in the United States did not match the severity of the failures in other countries, but they were surprising and disturbing. This was particularly because the United States Government acted like the guardian of human rights in the world. All human-rights violations ought to be prevented, not only those happening in foreign lands. One should have one yard-stick and an even handed scale by which one would measure the circumstances in all countries of the world, he said.
Other Committee experts also took the floor to express concerns that the prison population in the United States was higher than any country in the world and was increasingly susceptible to ill-treatment and torture. They urged the United States to suppress the “supermax” high security cells in prisons.
The United States delegation also included Christopher Camponovo, of the Office of the Assistant Legal Advisor, Department of State; Edward R. Cummings, Counsellor for Legal Affairs, at the United States Mission to the United Nations Office at Geneva; Pamela E. Holmes, Second Secretary; John D. Long, Counsellor for Political and Specialized Agencies Affairs at the Mission; Cheryl Sim, First Secretary; Stephen A. Solomon, Assistant Counsellor for Legal Affairs; Ande Surena, Assistant Legal Advisor for Human Rights and Refugees at the State Department; and William Yeoman, Chief of Staff for the Assistant Attorney General at the Department of Justice.
As one of the 119 States parties to the Convention against Torture, the United States must submit summaries of its performance to implement the provisions of the treaty.
The United States will provide its response to the questions raised this morning when it appears again before the Committee at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 11 May.
When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m., it will offer its conclusions and recommendations on the report of Paraguay. It will also hear the response of El Salvador to questions raised earlier by the Committee.
Report of United States
The initial report of the United States (document CAT/C/28/Add.5) enumerates the measures taken by the authorities to comply with the terms of the Convention. The section of the report dealing with general information enumerates the legal framework in which the provisions of the Convention are implemented. It says that torture does not occur in the United States except in aberrational situations and never as a matter of policy. When it does, it constitutes a serious criminal offence, subjecting the perpetrators to prosecution and entitling the victims to various remedies, including rehabilitation and compensation. Although there is no federal law criminalizing torture per se, any act falling within the Convention's definition of torture is clearly illegal and prosecutable everywhere in the country.
In its annexes, the report attaches a list of United States reservations, understandings and declarations on the Convention against Torture; relevant constitutional and legislative provisions; information on capital punishment; and Department of State regulations on torture, among other things. Under factors affecting implementation, the report indicates that the United States Government acknowledges continuing allegations of specific types of abuse and ill-treatment in particular cases, the existence of areas of concern in the context of the criminal justice system, and obstacles to the full achievement of the goals and objectives of the Convention.
The report affirms that the United States currently has the largest prison population and the highest incarceration rate of any country. Sentenced inmates numbered about 436 per 100,000 residents. By mid-year 1997, 1 in every 155 United States residents was incarcerated.
Presentation of Report
HAROLD HONGJU KOH, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labour of the United States, affirmed that his country had long been a vigorous supporter of the international fight against torture. It had played a major role in formulating the United Nations Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted in 1975, and in developing the Torture Convention.
To honour the United States’ commitment of its unequivocal and unambiguous condemnation of torture as a tool of governmental policy, Congress had legislated federal, civil and criminal sanctions against those who practised torture, Mr. Koh said. The courts condemned the practice as a matter of international, federal and state law. Under the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Torture Victims Protection Act, it was recognized that civil remedies against torture were found in the United States, and the federal and state executive branches had indicated zero tolerance for torture within their jurisdiction.
Mr. Koh continued to state that the United States viewed the Convention as a treaty with far-reaching domestic and international implications both in the administration of justice and the promotion of universal human rights. The Convention's norms were deeply internalized in American law and governmental practices, and the United States was committed to promoting the process of further internalization until every vestige of torture within the United States had been wiped out.
While the United States could not claim to have entirely eliminated torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment from the country, it was determined to make continuing progress, Mr. Koh said. The vibrant public debate about police conduct and prison issues in the country, for example, had helped ensure that the authorities constantly reexamined their practices with a view toward making necessary improvements. The United States also recognized that ending the practice of torture was only half the battle. Its commitment to help torture victims was not confined to US residents alone. It also committed to assisting torture victims throughout the world, and supported programmes in Latin America, Africa, Asia, Europe and in the newly independent States. The United States continued to be the largest single donor to the United Nations Voluntary Fund on Torture, having contributed over $ 12 million in total, and providing $ 3 million in 1999 alone.
WILLIAM YEOMANS, Chief of Staff to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the Department of Justice of the United States, affirmed that torture was prohibited by law throughout the United States; no person who committed the abuse while acting under cover of state or federal law was immune from prosecution; and when the Department of Justice was informed of credible allegations of abuse or ill-treatment by police officers, prison guards, or other state actors, those matters were investigated. If the evidence supported a prosecution, those cases were tried in open courts. In criminal matters, because of the federal system, state prosecutors also had the ability to bring the abuser to justice. Either way, those who committed torture in the United States were not above the law.
While the United States was committed to the full and effective implementation of its obligations under the Convention, within the United States there continued to be concerns warranting vigilance regarding matters such as the excessive use of force by law enforcement officers and physical and sexual abuse of inmates, Mr. Yeomans said. The Department of Justice also remained committed to prosecuting law enforcement officers for excessive use of force and other misconduct, protecting the constitutional rights of prisoners, and ensuring that police departments across the country refrained from engaging in patterns of misconduct.
Consideration of Report
PETER THOMAS BURNS, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of the United States, asked the delegation why the submission of the report was delayed by about five years. He said that there was a difference in the definition of torture by the United States and that of article 1 of the Convention. If the definition was not in conformity with the Convention, it was difficult for the United States to fulfil its obligations. He recalled that as a State party to the Convention, the United States had to report on the state of torture in the country; there was no statistical data on the situation of torture and no department was charged with collecting and filing on the issue. Because of the existing difference in the definition of torture, information concerning cases of torture should be taken with caution.
Mr. Burns said that if a person who risked to be expelled to his country of origin should prove that he would be subjected to torture, he should not be extradited or expelled as it was the Committee's view that the presence of a real risk was sufficient enough to justify non-refoulement or extradition. He expressed concern about the instructions to the new recruits of intelligence services, like the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), concerning the interrogation system they should apply. Quoting non-governmental sources such as Amnesty International, he said that the use of the electric belt on suspects interrogated by federal agents could cause considerable damage and suffering. Why did the United States not consider such practices as constituting cruel and inhuman treatment?
Mr. Burns also asked the delegation if the United States admitted the principle of universal jurisdiction for acts of torture committed anywhere, such as concerning the case of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. He gave other examples in which the United States did not act in arresting prosecutors of torture of other nationals who happened to be in its territory. He also mentioned another case in which the United States refused to extradite to Haiti a former official of the Duvallier regime, which he said constituted a violation of the provisions of the Convention.
SAYED KASSEM EL MASRY, the Committee expert who served as co-rapporteur to the report of the United States, provided a list of abuses which included excessive use of force and even brutality in all posts of police; death of prisoners in custody; overcrowding prison systems; physical and sexual abuse of inmates; lack of adequate training for police and prison guards; and racial bias and discrimination against members of minorities.
Mr. El Masry said that blacks constituted 40 per cent of the prison population while they constituted only 12 per cent of the whole population. Lack of police accountability, including failure to discipline, prosecute and punish police misconduct was also indicated. The excessively harsh conditions and unnecessary stringent procedures in "supermax" security facilities were also criticized.
Mr. El Masry recalled that there were increasing reports of prisoners being tortured and ill treated with electro-shock devices such as stun guns, stun shields or stun belts. Some reports claimed that prisoners had died as a result of those mechanical restraints. He asked if the authorities had made inquiries about the use of those instruments or the effect of chemical methods like the usage of pepper spray. Was there any evaluation of their effect? Was it true that 11 people had died in the United States after being placed in restraint chairs? Were some people interrogated while in the chair? And was it that true that those chairs were used also in juvenile detention centres and in the Immigration and Naturalization Service?
Mr. El Masry said that the problems relating to torture in the United States did not match the severity of the failures in other countries, but they were surprising and disturbing. This was because the United States Government acted like the guardian of human rights in the world. All human-rights violations ought to be prevented, not only those happening in foreign lands. One should have one yard-stick and an even handed scale by which one would measure the circumstances in all countries of the world.
Other members of the Committee also commented on the report. One expert said that according to the Vienna Convention on international treaties, a State party could not justify its non-fulfilment of its obligations on reasons of difficulties. As the number of prisoners increased, the risk of ill-treatment was inevitably higher. Another expert urged the United States to suppress the "supermax" high security cells in the prisons.
* *** *